I have a 2007 Sentra that has a starting problem. The car will intermittingly start fine and then I shut if off go into a store or run an errand and try to start the car but it does not start. I give if a few minutes and it will start. I hear the fuel pump kick on.

Sorry, but it does belong here. I believe Edmunds decides which car belong where in these discussions....not you. Cars are marketed by manufactures not the EPA and most people consider those to be the categories. Why you are so hung up on what the EPA says is beyond me.

I explained before that the EPA puts the Bentley Continental Flying Spur(about $200k by the way) in the same midsize category as the Chevy Cruze. Nobody in their right mind would say they are in the same category. One is almost twice the size/weight as the other and is marketed as a large luxury barge while the other is marketed as a small economy car. Why would anyone want them to be in the same size catergory for discussion purposes? Just because the EPA says they have the similar passenger/cargo volume.

I don't think anyone(besides you possibly) would argue that the Elantra, Corolla, Mazda3, Cruze and the Buick Verona(Cruze based) don't belong in the same discussion category. But the EPA has some in compact and some in midsize. Totally silly. In fact the Mazda3 sedan is compact and the Mazda3 5 door is midsize according to the EPA. Again, silly.

I agree with much of what m6user says about the compact market class vs. EPA size categories. One caveat though. When discussing 5-door hatchbacks they are measured using total interior volume (to the roofline) and that nearly always results in a higher interior volume versus sedans with a conventinal trunk. Even a Hyundai Accent 5-door goes into the midsize class on interior volume but the EPA normally "adjusts" 5-doors down to their correct market class.

Also, with more and more "large compacts" hitting the road, we might need to redefine what this class of vehicle really should be. The 2012 Jetta at 112 cu.ft. of volume is a good example - as it is significantly larger than a new Focus or Corolla. Almost a size class larger. As other manufacturers build these "mid-size compacts", a new C/D segment may be born.

The new Elantra and Jetta are family size sedans in Europe. The paradigm is shifting in the U.S.

A reporter is looking to interview midsize or small car owners who recently switched from Honda or Toyota to Chrysler, Ford or GM. Email pr@edmunds.com no later than Thursday, January 5, 2012 with your daytime contact information and a few words about your decision and your experience so far.

The other day I saw a Cruze next to a Volvo 850. The Cruze (Verano/etc) made the Volvo look like it was anorexic by comparison. Sure, the Cruze looks all small and round by today's standards, but cars really have all gotten fat and massive over the last 20 years. To the point where even something like a Yaris is larger than an old VW Bug.

What really happened is that so few cars fit in the compact and sub-compact categories simply because they aren't being made that small any more. The same thing happened in the 60s, you'll remember. Cars became truly massive to the point where a normal sized car from the 50s suddenly looked like a toy by comparison.

Upsizing of cars has been happening for a long time. For example, when Accord was introduced, it was a sub-compact by today's standards--just 162 inches long. Now it's nearly 195 inches long--almost 3 FEET longer--and has the interior room of a full-sized car by the EPA measurements.

The Accord is a good example of a "tweener" car. It's considered a "mid-sized" sedan by most people, but is long and roomy for its class. Another example is the Verano, and also cars like the Elantra and Jetta: smaller than today's "mid-sized" cars outside, but with the interior room of a mid-sized car per EPA numbers.

As cars have been upsized, our definition of what a "compact" is and what a "mid-sized" car is have changed also. We could continue to use definitions from 35 years ago. Or we could adapt to the reality of today's automotive market.

The average American has grown a lot since the 60s as well. That was fifty years ago and people have been getting larger. The small suburb where I live has several linemen on it's high school football team that are over 6'4" and weigh close to and over 275 lbs. When I went to high school in the same size town I don't think we had anybody on our team over 6'1" and nobody weighed over 200. It's just a fact that not only have we gotten large in overall size but weight is even more pronounced as detailed in media left and right. Hence bigger cars just to provide room for this bodily expansion. That is but one reason. Could people cram themselves into the subcompacts of yesteryear? Sure, if they had to but that's not the case.

Another reason is safety impact standards. It's still easier to protect occupants with a little room and bulk around them. You have to have somewhere to put all those crushzones and airbags. And still another reason is that longer wheelbases usually provide a smoother ride than a short wheelbase and most people like smooth rides.

No hatch = fail. I can understand not going hatch-only, doing that with the Caliber was dumb. But more people are wanting the option, and it's not like it would have taken that much effort as long as they were grafting a trunk on.

Compacts like the Cruze, Elantra (new design), and Sentra seem to be selling pretty well w/o a hatch variant. Personally I prefer a hatch, but for those looking for a compact sedan, the Dart gives them what looks like another good option--a better option than Dodge offered in the recent past. Which was... uh... nothing!

Have you seen any other...HATCHES? The Sonic is the only one, and I'm wondering what the product mix they're building is, particularly compared to demand. Every time they're asked they say they're not going to bring the Cruze hatch here, and Americans don't buy hatches. Guess they forgot to tell all of those Focus and Fiesta hatch buyers...or the Fit hatch buyers...or the Impreza hatch buyers, or the Mazda3 and Mazda2 hatch buyers....

There is a good reason that GM doesn't make any hatchbacks (other than the Sonic)- look at their track record with hatches-

Malibu Maxx- before seeing the Maxx, I didn't think it was possible to make the last gen Malibu look any worse! From certain angles, it looks eerily like the Chevy Citation 5-door (aka- X-car)...and it was ugly 30+ years ago.

Camaro/Firebird- no further commentary needed....

But in some model lines, no matter how great the Hatch version may be, the Sedan/Coupe versions sell 4:1 or better???

One major exception, with the 5-door accounting for almost 40% of the model sales, is the Mazda3.

You didn't like the looks of the Camaro? No red corpuscles flowing through your arteries, I guess.

I actually liked some of the previous Camaro models in appearance. Say in the mid eighties.

The current Camaro is so overstyled to me, with gunslit windows and ugly rear taillights. It seems to scream "look at me - I'm young and full of hormones and stupid!!!!".

But it's not even a sedan! I do like the looks of Cruze a lot - very understated and classy. The Jetta I thought was boring, but it is slowly growing on me and is certainly not offensive looking, just bland.

Since I couldn't find a "compact suv/cuv" forum I will ask this question here and hope a host sees it and responds.

I notice that the new Mazda CX-5 forum is up but there are no discussions and try as I might I could not find any info on how to start a discussion. Usually it seems a host puts in the first entry and says something like "discuss the new CX-5 here". I spent time searching and trying to find help on how to start a discussion to no avail. If possible could a host start a discussion of the CX-5 so that it is easy for newbees and dumber oldies like me to add posts???

Right above the list of discussions (not the list of folders, just the list of general discussions there), there's an "add a discussion" link. Go ahead and add the discussion. Once the vehicle is ready to be released, we'll move it into its own folder with an M&R discussion, Prices Paid, leasing, all that.

I made my annual pilgrimage to the local auto show today and checked out the latest compacts--mostly the hatches since that's my target for my next car, but looked at the sedans also. Of those I hadn't seen before, I was most impressed by the Verano. Very nicely done interior (this was with the leather and wood trim), very comfortable seats front and back. And more rear leg room than I expected based on reviews that complain about lack of rear leg room. It's no limo but for a compact car, it has sufficient rear leg room for my needs (but I'm only 5'9-1/2") and comparable to or better than many other compacts. The car I sat in was pretty loaded with leather and moonroof and listed at over $27k. I talked with a Buick rep for quite awhile (didn't hurt that she was very attractive :-) ) and found out what was on the base car and the summer availability of the 2.0T from the Regal, which she thought would be available with the 6MT. Now THAT would be one nice little car.

The other compact that I got new respect for at the auto show is the Jetta. There was a base (S) model there with a stick and moonroof, but only $18.5k. And roomier in back leg-wise than many mid-sized sedans. Sure, it's fairly spartan and has only the 2.0L 115-hp engine, but at the right price would make a pretty nice package. Anything else in the class with a moonroof would probably be $2000+ more. I still like the Golf better (but that's another discussion).

I re-acquainted myself with the Elantra, Mazda3, Impreza, and Focus since they are all (in hatch form) on my list. It's great to do the "sit tests" on different cars within a few minutes of each other. Based on today plus my other experiences including test drives, the top two are now the Mazda3i Touring and the Golf. The Focus went down a LOT on my list because I found out the rear seat does NOT fold flat as a sales rep told me awhile back. But the rear seat of the Mazda3 and Impreza do fold flat, and the Golf pretty much so. The Impreza went down a notch because the tan interior, which I prefer over black, looked pretty cheap on the plastic bits especially the door handles. The HVAC controls are also cheap-feeling. But the Impreza stays in the race because of its AWD advantage.